<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!--  RSS generated by Flaimo.com RSS Builder [2010-09-09 11:40:41]  --> <rss version="2.0" xmlns:im="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/item-images/" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" >
<channel>
<docs>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/</docs>
<description>Mantis - ISSUES</description>
<link>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/</link>
<title>Mantis - ISSUES</title>

<category>All Projects</category>
<ttl>10</ttl>
<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
<sy:updateBase>2010-09-09T11:40:41-05:00</sy:updateBase>
<item>
<title>0000129: SO-C does not allow you to save all the settings.</title>
<link>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=129</link>
<description>When you are choosing all your settings before printing in SO-C you do not get the option to Save your settings when you've entered your last settings(Sort by SO,Cust,Job#,Name).</description>
<guid>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=129</guid>
<author>HecTech &lt;HecTech@example.com&gt;</author>
<comments>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=129#bugnotes</comments>
</item>
<item>
<title>0000128: Printing a text based packing slip (packing slip print format 5) on a laser printer, prints two pages.</title>
<link>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=128</link>
<description>When printing a text based packing slip (packing slip print format 5) on a laser printer, a second page (header only) is printed for each packing slip.</description>
<guid>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=128</guid>
<author>HecTech &lt;HecTech@example.com&gt;</author>
<comments>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=128#bugnotes</comments>
</item>
<item>
<title>0000122: RTM T6JCS1.RTM</title>
<link>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=122</link>
<description>When go int JC-S and print output on T6JCS1.RTM, setup labor cost is excluded in the labor detail section, but the corresponding overhead cost is displayed and part to the total cost.  The setup labor cost is not displayed and not included in the total cost.</description>
<guid>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=122</guid>
<author>Dennis &lt;Dennis@example.com&gt;</author>
<comments>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=122#bugnotes</comments>
</item>
<item>
<title>0000125: RTM T6JCA1.RTM, Summary Section not calculating setup variance</title>
<link>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=125</link>
<description>When in JC-A and print T6JAC1.RTM, variance is not calculated for setup labor</description>
<guid>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=125</guid>
<author>Dennis &lt;Dennis@example.com&gt;</author>
<comments>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=125#bugnotes</comments>
</item>
<item>
<title>0000116: PO-I-G not working in 07/05/10 update</title>
<link>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=116</link>
<description>I go into PO-I-G enter my filters and press print and I get the following error.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
access violation at address 0082285C in module 'evoerp.exe'. read of address 0000019C</description>
<guid>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=116</guid>
<author>HecTech &lt;HecTech@example.com&gt;</author>
<comments>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=116#bugnotes</comments>
</item>
<item>
<title>0000127: Voucher being reversed when in Edit voucher</title>
<link>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=127</link>
<description>Once you have entered a voucher in AP-B and you try to go back and edit the voucher and say you need to exit it to check something (which I did) when you try to go back in to edit it again it does not show up.  Went into GL-I to see where it went and it was showing that it had been reversed.  When you go back and re-enter it it causes another problem.  In AP-A under the credit info the amount of the voucher that had been reversed shows up as a credit, (original voucher was for $125.00 shows up under vendor credit as -$125.00).  Upon further investigation it also shows up under AP-F as a credit, but once you enter past the vendor name it zeroes out.  Also shows up in AP-I as -$125.00.</description>
<guid>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=127</guid>
<author>HecTech &lt;HecTech@example.com&gt;</author>
<comments>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=127#bugnotes</comments>
</item>
<item>
<title>0000126: Est standard cost value not correct in T7WOA.RWN when # in Team greater than 1</title>
<link>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=126</link>
<description>I have attaced a compressed file that contain files I refer to below:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I do not believe the estimated standard cost being pulling by T7WOA.RWN is not correct if # in team is greater than 1 in the routing file.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Attachment “Rout Std” shows routing with setup &amp; run times.  Notice SEQ 20 and 40 have # in team of 2 &amp; 6 respectively.  Cost for these operations are calculated by taking the time in “Time/Pt”, multiplied by the number in team, times hourly rate of $9.54/hr (AccuMED’s hourly rate).  Example: SEQ 40 is .0076923 X 6 = $ 0.0461538 X $9.54 = $0.440307252.  This is displayed in attachment “Costed Rout”, SEQ 40.  By continuing this process for all sequences, the sum of all costed labor is $.574327.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The cost that is being pulled in by T7WOA see attachment “WO-A”) and as displayed in T6JCA1.RTM is only the sum of the column “Time/Pt” as shown on the attachment “Rout” X $9.54 and does NOT include the calculation of # in team as does the costing program.  Example: sum of “Time/Pt” column is .0157164.  This times $9.54 = $.149933496, same as appears as unit estimate on T6JCA1.RTM and in WO-A when multiplied by WO Qty ( $.149933496 X 9000 = $1349.410104).  The accurate time is 0.0120482 (2 X .0060241) + .0020000 (1 X .0020000) + 0.0461538 (6 X .0076923) = .060202 X $9.54 = $.574327.  Because of this, the variances reported in the various reports are inaccurate.</description>
<guid>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=126</guid>
<author>Dennis &lt;Dennis@example.com&gt;</author>
<comments>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=126#bugnotes</comments>
</item>
<item>
<title>0000124: Vendors not showing up in IN-A when Receivers button is pressed.</title>
<link>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=124</link>
<description>Went into Evo, IN-A under a purchased part and clicked the Receivers button, only the last receiver shows a vendor.  I checked under multiple items same result on some, no vendors on others.  Seems to work fine in Classic</description>
<guid>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=124</guid>
<author>HecTech &lt;HecTech@example.com&gt;</author>
<comments>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=124#bugnotes</comments>
</item>
<item>
<title>0000101: System freezes up when creating PO notes in Classic View</title>
<link>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=101</link>
<description>User Setting is Classic view (PO-A) and evo notes turned on (SD-Q).  Go into PO-A, edit a PO, select lines.  Click the notes icon and then select the icon to copy notes...system freezes up.  Does not freeze in evo view.</description>
<guid>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=101</guid>
<author>Dennis &lt;Dennis@example.com&gt;</author>
<comments>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=101#bugnotes</comments>
</item>
<item>
<title>0000113: WO-F Scrap reporting not working completely after 01/22/10 update</title>
<link>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=113</link>
<description>When reporting scrap via WO-F, a &quot;G&quot; transaction code is no longer created and recorded in INVTXN file.  Also, when it was working (09/16/09 update), reversing the WO-F entry and corresponding scrap record did not create a negative G transaction in the transaction record, nor does it now with 01/22/10, SP3.  In addition, a WO-F scrap entry reduces the WO balance, but a reversal of Scrap in WO-F does not reverse the quantity completed record in the WO Header.  Finally, if recording a % complete in WO-F, it skips over the Qty Scrapped and Scrap Code field.</description>
<guid>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=113</guid>
<author>Dennis &lt;Dennis@example.com&gt;</author>
<comments>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=113#bugnotes</comments>
</item>
<item>
<title>0000123: Service &amp; Repair Serial number problems</title>
<link>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=123</link>
<description>1.    We either convert an RMA to a S/R or enter the S/R itself using the S/R – A.&lt;br /&gt;
2.    Convert to a WO using S/R – C&lt;br /&gt;
3.    Print traveler – WO-C&lt;br /&gt;
4.    Issue material- WO-G&lt;br /&gt;
a.    It is here when I enter a part that has a serial number, I must chose the serial # at the time I assign the part to the WO.&lt;br /&gt;
5.    Release S/R – E&lt;br /&gt;
a.    Calculate the COG&lt;br /&gt;
b.    Save&lt;br /&gt;
c.    Enter tracking number&lt;br /&gt;
d.    Save&lt;br /&gt;
e.    Select N to print pack slip and N to print invoice&lt;br /&gt;
f.     At this point if you look under the transaction history, you can see that the part issued with a serial # (a camera for instance) has been invoiced under that service repair&lt;br /&gt;
6.    We then go and print the invoice under S/R -F &lt;br /&gt;
7.    Then under S/R – G when we try to post it, it then asks for a serial number. We can’t pull the serial number because I’ve already accounted for it under the WO. You can then look under the part # and see it has completed 2 transactions, one is correct with the right dollar amount and the other (which we have to make up a serial number for) shows as $0. So then we have to go back in and zero out the quantity.</description>
<guid>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=123</guid>
<author>HecTech &lt;HecTech@example.com&gt;</author>
<comments>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=123#bugnotes</comments>
</item>
<item>
<title>0000120: PO-A populates the ship-to fields with something other than Default address</title>
<link>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=120</link>
<description>When I enter a new PO, after I enter in the vendor code, the correct default address for the company is populating in the Ship to fields. However, after I tab over to the actual Ship-to field it automatically changes the fields to the following: “Was in BKICLOC, not BKICLOCM”. It is not popping up with the list of default addresses, just populating the first field.</description>
<guid>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=120</guid>
<author>HecTech &lt;HecTech@example.com&gt;</author>
<comments>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=120#bugnotes</comments>
</item>
<item>
<title>0000119: AP-F pulling wrong Vendor information</title>
<link>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=119</link>
<description>Running the 7/5/10 update. When using AP-F, invoice dates are incorrect when selecting items to pay and Vendor information(address) is incorrect when printing the statement.</description>
<guid>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=119</guid>
<author>HecTech &lt;HecTech@example.com&gt;</author>
<comments>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=119#bugnotes</comments>
</item>
<item>
<title>0000118: Sales Orders are missing</title>
<link>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=118</link>
<description>Running the latest update 7/5/10 in either Classic or EVO. When in SO-A and choosing to edit a existing SO. I chose to edit a line in the SO, I ended up exiting the SO choosing not to save any changes made. When I returned to the list of SO's I discovered the SO was missing. I was not able to duplicate the problem again and there is no trace the SO that came up missing ever existed. After talking to few people who have experience the same problem I believe the problem has been there for some time now and was not caused by any of the updates.</description>
<guid>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=118</guid>
<author>HecTech &lt;HecTech@example.com&gt;</author>
<comments>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=118#bugnotes</comments>
</item>
<item>
<title>0000117: WO-I Rebuild Work Order Costs hangs</title>
<link>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=117</link>
<description>WO-I Rebuild WO Costs (which calls the WO-K-H program) hangs since the 7/5/10 update but only for certain users</description>
<guid>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=117</guid>
<author>lpantic &lt;lpantic@example.com&gt;</author>
<comments>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=117#bugnotes</comments>
</item>
<item>
<title>0000115: Handheld moduel transfer inventory not working properly.</title>
<link>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=115</link>
<description>HH-K&lt;br /&gt;
	When using the Transfer inventory in the Handheld module. It will not let me enter a new bin. Cannot enter passed the To Location. My default settings for WC are as follows.&lt;br /&gt;
Enable Warehouse Control:  	Q (Does not matter whether its set to Y or Q)&lt;br /&gt;
Use Controlled Bin Locations:	N&lt;br /&gt;
Allow Blank Bins Location:   	 Y&lt;br /&gt;
It was working in the January update but it is not working now on the latest update 7/5/10 update.</description>
<guid>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=115</guid>
<author>HecTech &lt;HecTech@example.com&gt;</author>
<comments>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=115#bugnotes</comments>
</item>
<item>
<title>0000114: WO-G List issue shows On hand values for Non-Inventory parts when the list comes up.</title>
<link>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=114</link>
<description>When doing a List issue in WO-G. If the BOM has Non-inventory parts in it the list issue will not accurately reflect the On Hand which on a Non inventory part should be Zero as the system does not keep track of non inventory parts. This problem is occurring in the new 1/22 and new 07/05 update.</description>
<guid>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=114</guid>
<author>HecTech &lt;HecTech@example.com&gt;</author>
<comments>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=114#bugnotes</comments>
</item>
<item>
<title>0000111: Closed PO excluded from PO-J-B Report</title>
<link>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=111</link>
<description>If PO-J-B is run as of a prior date and a PO Has since been closed, those PO Lines are excluded from the report.</description>
<guid>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=111</guid>
<author>lpantic &lt;lpantic@example.com&gt;</author>
<comments>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=111#bugnotes</comments>
</item>
<item>
<title>0000112: Vendor Info in IN-A giving Error messages.</title>
<link>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=112</link>
<description>In Evo 1/22/10 SP3 we found that if you go into IN-A, Classic view, enter a purchased item and click on the Vendors button you get 2 error messages.  See below attached files.  This also occurs in Evo View under the Sources tab when you hit the Vendor Item no. button.</description>
<guid>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=112</guid>
<author>HecTech &lt;HecTech@example.com&gt;</author>
<comments>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=112#bugnotes</comments>
</item>
<item>
<title>0000110: Lot Controlled Component of Make From gets wrong sign on Txn</title>
<link>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=110</link>
<description>PO Receipt of Make From item ends up with a negative Inventory Transaction &quot;M&quot; record when the component is under Lot Control.  Serial Control is likely the same.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Actual inventory and Lot control costing and porocessing is correct; it is nonly the INVTXN record itself that is negative when iot should be positive</description>
<guid>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=110</guid>
<author>lpantic &lt;lpantic@example.com&gt;</author>
<comments>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=110#bugnotes</comments>
</item>
<item>
<title>0000109: WO-I does not prompt for Bin</title>
<link>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=109</link>
<description>With component backflushing turned on and WC set to Q, WO-I does not always prompt for the Bin for the end item being made inthe work order</description>
<guid>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=109</guid>
<author>lpantic &lt;lpantic@example.com&gt;</author>
<comments>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=109#bugnotes</comments>
</item>
<item>
<title>0000105: UT-A program GLEREDO.run calculates Retained Earnings incorrectly</title>
<link>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=105</link>
<description>After running UT-K-D Recalc GL Chart of Accounts and subsequently running UT-A file GLEREDO, my retained earnings are not accurate causing my GL to be out of balance (Assets &lt;&gt; Liab+OE); I was only able to get things back in balance by manually editing both files ISGLCOA and BKGLCOA and overwriting values from a backup into the values for my Retained Earnings account. Though it does look like a change occurred to BKUTKD.run recently, I could not find any errors in my BKGLTRAN file; also, though it looks like no changes have been made to file GLEREDO.run in years, my guess would be that something is wrong with how it addresses Retained Earnings when the year 2010 is a factor? Though that is just a guess; that's why you're the programmers and I'm just an admin trying not to screw up my accounting files.</description>
<guid>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=105</guid>
<author>dkpruett &lt;dkpruett@example.com&gt;</author>
<comments>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=105#bugnotes</comments>
</item>
<item>
<title>0000108: AP-B Voucher posts AP as Debit rather than Credit</title>
<link>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=108</link>
<description>GL Posting generated by AP-B sometimes posts the AP side of the transaction as a Debit rather than a credit causing out of balance posting</description>
<guid>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=108</guid>
<author>Lynn_Pantic &lt;Lynn_Pantic@example.com&gt;</author>
<comments>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=108#bugnotes</comments>
</item>
<item>
<title>0000069: errors after print grid</title>
<link>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=69</link>
<description>After printing a grid of shipments from IN-A, by printing to preview and then printing to printer, then closing the preview screen and pressing the exit grid button, the grid pops up again and then an access violation when trying to close. Must restart program.</description>
<guid>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=69</guid>
<author>stevecyr &lt;stevecyr@example.com&gt;</author>
<comments>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=69#bugnotes</comments>
</item>
<item>
<title>0000052: Posting Invoices with applied deposits sometimes fails with an error message</title>
<link>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=52</link>
<description>If an invoice is posted that has applied deposits while another user has AR-N (Enter/Print Customer Deposits) open, an error is displayed that says that the invoice was printed with a deposit, but the deposit has less than or equal to zero available.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In EVO, the posting program asks for a check number, but it still leaves the deposit in AR-N.</description>
<guid>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=52</guid>
<author>kevind &lt;kevind@example.com&gt;</author>
<comments>http://istechsupport.com/bugtrack/view.php?id=52#bugnotes</comments>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
